Awesome article by Chris Gebhardt on the status of BEO Habs:http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2015/11/nasa-progress-habitat-development-deep-space-exploration/With some sexy renders from Nathan added into the mix. (Hosting in the Orion section, but leaving a placeholder in Commercial Crew - which may seem strange, but "commercial" partners and they are going to host "crew")
It would be interesting to see a rough breakdown of the budget for the various projects mentioned in this article. Some things are clearly not negligible, such as the BEAM to ISS next year but after that I get a bit hazy. What level of NASA commitment right now is there to build a DSH? If so, on what timeline?Great article and great to be reminded that stuff is actually happening.
NASA has no commitment on DSH.
Quote from: Jim on 11/14/2015 11:47 pmNASA has no commitment on DSH.They are publically saying in front of congress that their goal is to put a man on Mars. How are they going to do that without eventually building some sort of DSH? I'm pretty sure lying in front of Congress is illegal. NASA has made a commitment to attempt to land a person on Mars in the 2030s to justify their funding. Not actually taking steps to do that would be like the DoD not attempting to defend the U.S. if it was under attack.
Quote from: Jim on 11/14/2015 11:47 pmNASA has no commitment on DSH.They are publically saying in front of congress that their goal is to put a man on Mars.
How are they going to do that without eventually building some sort of DSH?
I'm pretty sure lying in front of Congress is illegal.
NASA has made a commitment to attempt to land a person on Mars in the 2030s to justify their funding. Not actually taking steps to do that would be like the DoD not attempting to defend the U.S. if it was under attack.
Quote from: ncb1397 on 11/15/2015 02:18 pmQuote from: Jim on 11/14/2015 11:47 pmNASA has no commitment on DSH.They are publically saying in front of congress that their goal is to put a man on Mars.Mars has been a goal, if not the goal for humans, for decades. Nothing has changed recently.QuoteHow are they going to do that without eventually building some sort of DSH?Depending on how we eventually go, a Deep Space Hab may not be required.QuoteI'm pretty sure lying in front of Congress is illegal.NASA is not lying by saying it wants to go to Mars. But NASA doesn't have the authorization to go to Mars yet - that comes from Congress and the President. All NASA is doing today is studies and preliminary development that would be useful for more than just sending humans to Mars.QuoteNASA has made a commitment to attempt to land a person on Mars in the 2030s to justify their funding. Not actually taking steps to do that would be like the DoD not attempting to defend the U.S. if it was under attack.NASA is a small agency within the U.S. Government, and reports to the President. The President, not NASA, determines what NASA will ask for from Congress, and Congress, not NASA, decides what NASA will get funded to work on (I'm simplifying, since the President has to sign or veto legislation).The point is that NASA does what our elected officials tell it to do, or allow it to do. NASA does not operate independently, and cannot make commitments on it's own.
Regarding the roles a DSH could play, assuming the next U.S. President and NASA administrator get it planned in more detailed writing, I see 3 of them:1) Prototype testbed for long term life support and radiation shielding.2) Waypoint space station for international Lunar expeditions.3) Become the Mars Transit Vehicle itself through upgrades and longevity.Current administrator Bolden said, echoing Obama's "we've been there before" speech, that a Lunar vehicle is just too expensive to build. However a Lunar space station, so long as managed more properly than the ISS' nearly 30-year birthing process (space station Freedom et al), might be in a better price range while offering some usefulness. Assuming the DSH is modular and as long-lasting as the ISS has been, I wager it may have the option of being retrofitted for Mars duty - an upgrade the ISS by comparison was never meant for.
Quote from: redliox on 11/15/2015 04:41 pmRegarding the roles a DSH could play, assuming the next U.S. President and NASA administrator get it planned in more detailed writing, I see 3 of them:1) Prototype testbed for long term life support and radiation shielding.2) Waypoint space station for international Lunar expeditions.3) Become the Mars Transit Vehicle itself through upgrades and longevity.Current administrator Bolden said, echoing Obama's "we've been there before" speech, that a Lunar vehicle is just too expensive to build. However a Lunar space station, so long as managed more properly than the ISS' nearly 30-year birthing process (space station Freedom et al), might be in a better price range while offering some usefulness. Assuming the DSH is modular and as long-lasting as the ISS has been, I wager it may have the option of being retrofitted for Mars duty - an upgrade the ISS by comparison was never meant for.If a working spacestation exists and is doing things for the Moon it will be easier to build a second one with a similar design for Mars.
The president has said that the goal is Mars.
As you say, NASA is obligated to abide by both the law and the executive head. They are obligated to attempt to accomplish what they have been assigned to do.
Anyways. NASA has made a commitment to the extent that they are able to commit to anything.
Obviously, they don't have complete free agency to do whatever they want.